TEDE515-15 Assignment 3:

Critical Discussion on Teacher Inquiry

Educational Research
Educational research is defined by Mutch (2005) as a broad classification of research that
critically focuses on people, places and processes to solve a problem or answer a question, with
the purposeful intention of improving teaching and learning (Anderson, 1998; Wellington, 2015). It
is both theoretical and practical in nature, however despite previous perceptions of the
requirement of a scientific method, educational research is not restricted by specific data
gathering approaches, and includes both quantitative and qualitative data (Henning, Stone &
Kelly, 2009; Mutch, 2005; Wellington, 2015). Mutch (2005) defines quantitative methods as the
provision of objective, valid and reliable information, whereas qualitative methods are referred to
as gathering rich, descriptive and subjective evidence (Wellington, 2015). Despite the strong
distinctions, Mutch (2005) argues that both have a place and relevance within educational
research and can be used collaboratively in a mixed methods or triangulation approach
(Wellington, 2015). However, it is clear the continued debate regarding an approach that provides
the most transferability of learning within a variety of situations and contexts (Wellington, 2015).
Wellington (2015) enhances this argument by stating that educational research can be messy,
with extraneous variables unexpectedly interrupting and disrupting the research project.
Therefore ethical considerations are paramount throughout the research to ensure ethical issues
are avoided (Wellington, 2015). This essay will critically discuss the use of the Teaching as
Inquiry model of action research as an educational research method, as well as a methodology.
This essay will continue to critically consider ethical implications for research and my position as
insider-researcher. Lastly, it will consider potential areas/models of research to increase students
autonomy and collaboration.
Teaching as Inquiry
There are a variety of approaches and type of educational research, which investigate a
problem or question through a range and mixture of perspectives. For the purposes of this
research, the approached used will be Teaching as Inquiry, which is grounded in action research
(Wellington, 2015). In the more specific context of Teaching as Inquiry, this cyclical process is
applied to and within a teachers own practice, where the student is placed in the centre of the
inquiry (MOE, 2007b). Although there are a variety of Teaching as Inquiry models developed, for
the purpose of this essay I will focus on the Teaching as Inquiry model adapted by MOE (2007b)
Initially developed by Aitken and Sinnema (2008), MOE (2007b) adapted the multifaceted
Teaching as Inquiry model for the purpose of enabling teachers to increase students outcomes
and improve teachers practice (Hill, Stremmel & Fu, 2005). MOE (2007b) outline four stages of
the Teaching as Inquiry research approach: focusing inquiry, teaching inquiry, teaching and
learning and learning inquiry (refer to figure 1). Hill, Stremmel and Fu (2005) present the notion of
1

inquiry as a stance of not knowing, therefore requiring the researcher to learn through observing,
reflecting, questioning and theorising at each stage of the Teaching as Inquiry cycle.

Figure 1. Ministry of Education Teaching as Inquiry model (Ministry of Education, 2007b).

Teaching as inquiry follows a systematic process to reflect on teaching practice and its
impact on learners outcomes (Aitken & Sinnema, 2008). The cycle starts with the focusing
inquiry stage, where teachers consider students current learning and the outcomes intended for
students (MOE, 2007b). This provides teachers with an understanding of students learning and
helps determine students direction. The key question to consider within the focusing inquiry
stage is what is important (and therefore worth spending time on), given where my students are
at? (MOE, 2009, p. 16).Within the teaching inquiry stage, teachers purposefully make research
and evidence based decisions to plan teaching and learning experiences, which utilise effective
pedagogical strategies that enhance students learning and outcomes (MOE, 2007b). The key
question to consider within this stage is what strategies (evidence-based) are most likely to help
my students learn what they need to learn? (MOE, 2009, para. 31). Consequently, the teaching
and learning stage of the cycle involves the implementation and action of the planned teaching
and learning experiences (MOE, 2007b). Lastly the learning inquiry stage involves investigating
the impact the teaching and learning had on student outcomes, collecting both short-term and
long term evidence against the identified outcomes and considering consequent future teaching
and learning opportunities. The key question to consider at this stage of the Teaching as Inquiry
process is what happened as a result of the teaching, and what are the implications for future
teaching? (MOE, 2009, p. 46). The information from the learning inquiry must be analysed and
evaluated to decide students level of achievement against the intended outcomes. If change is
needed, the research returns to the teaching inquiry to develop and adapt plans to improve
students outcomes in the determined area. However, if students learning was successful against
2

the outcomes, the researcher returns to the focusing inquiry stage where the focus is on the next
step for learners (MOE, 2007b). However Aitken and Sinnema (2008) argue that it may not be as
clearly defined in practice, with stages simultaneously overlapping and answers not easily
available. Despite the complexities in practice, the Teaching as Inquiry model provides a
framework for teachers to effectively reflect and take action to improve pedagogical practice
(Aitken & Sinnema, 2008).
Methodology
The current focus on teacher inquiry within the New Zealand Curriculum (NZC) is related
to the emphasis on diversity considerations and increasing student achievement (Aitken &
Sinnema, 2008; MOE, 2007a). This highlights that every student, teacher, classroom, school and
community are different and have unique characteristics that need to be acknowledged when
developing and considering pedagogical strategies (MOE, 2007a). Therefore in order to increase
student outcomes, a blanket best practice approach to teachers professional development is not
sufficient. Instead Aitken and Sinnema (2008) argue that context needs to be considered to
understand the effectiveness of teaching strategies. Aitken and Sinnema (2008) conclude that
student outcomes can be improved by teachers inquiring about the impact their own pedagogical
practice has on the teaching and learning of their students (MOE, 2009). However, CochranSmith and Boston College Evidence Team (2009) also emphasise the focus on evidence-based
practice, where changes and next steps are considered based on evidenced outcomes.
Teaching as inquiry is constructed on the notion of action research. Introduced by Kurt
Lewin in 1946, action research is illustrated by Cunningham (1993) and Sarantakos (2005) as a
long-term and continuous system, centred around planning, researching and learning, in relation
to a problem or application. Although there are numerous action research models, Wellington
(2015) and Henning, Stone and Kelly (2009) describe the underlying process as a cycle of
planning, acting, observing/evaluating, reflecting and re-planning, where it is driven by change
and lends itself more towards qualitative methods. The theoretical underpinning of action
research and consequently Teaching as Inquiry is its cyclical nature, where the process is
continuously adapting and changing to meet the teachers and students needs.
Despite the claimed advantages of Teaching as Inquiry research methodology, the
disadvantages must be considered. Skourdoumbis and Gale (2013) question the linear nature of
measuring and comparing students achievement to specific teacher inquiry instruction. The
argument follows the notion that action research is messy, with the inability to control some
extraneous variables and an uncertainty of teacher inquiry instruction instigating student
achievement (Skourdoumbis & Gale, 2013). It is also important to note the time limitations of
teachers effect the Teaching as Inquiry approach to professional development. Timperley, Wilson,
Barrar and Fung (2007) claim considerable amount of professional development occurs
informally and incidentally, where learning has little documented evidence. Yet this informal
research and learning has little consideration within the Teaching as Inquiry approach (Timperley,
3

Wilson, Barrar & Fung, 2007). Lastly, there is a hidden assumption within the Teaching as Inquiry
approach that change is inherently good, however Alton-Lee (2005) highlights that change in
teaching practice can have a negative impact on students outcomes.
Ethical Considerations
A number of ethical considerations need to be made prior to conducting educational
research. Firstly, the researcher must ensure that the research follows the negotiated ethical
consent process, through voluntary participation, informed consent requirements and the
opportunity to withdraw (Mutch, 2005; McNiff & Whitehead, 2010). During the research process,
the researcher must also ensure that all data collected will maintain confidentiality and anonymity
(Mutch, 2005; McNiff & Whitehead, 2010). During the data gathering process it is essential the
participants are not coerced or deceived in order to complete the requirements of the research.
This is also important within the realms of participant safety, where the researcher must ensure
that the research will not cause participants psychological, physical, emotional or cultural harm
(Mutch, 2005; Henning, Stone & Kelly, 2009). In order to mitigate this risk, the researcher must be
highly aware of sensitivities and avoid undue intrusion, as well as ensure a safe and inviting
environment/situation which is beneficial for all participants. In spite of this if these ethical
consideration cannot be guaranteed, participants need to be well informed and given
opportunities to opt out of the research without consequences (Mutch, 2005).
Finally, it is essential that I consider my position as an insider researcher and implications
for the participants and the research (Mutch, 2005). My position as student teacher within the
classroom provides me with situational and pedagogical knowledge, as well as access to
resources and materials that will be used to strengthen insights gained throughout the research.
However, my role as student teacher also creates a conflict of interest and bias within the
research process, and can create difficulties in maintaining ethically appropriate considerations
(Mutch, 2005).

Preliminary Idea
I am interested in the development of pedagogy to increase and support students
autonomy and/or collaboration within the learning environment, in order to motivate and engage
students in learning. This interest has grown from previously experiencing a highly teacher-driven
learning environment and observing an obvious lack of students motivation and ability to work
independently when teacher direction is not present.
Autonomy is defined by Boud (1988) as an individuals responsiveness to their
environment and situations, where they create unique responses to presented circumstances.
Boud (1988) argues that it is fundamental for individuals to develop the ability to make their own
decisions on what to think and do in a variety of situations, which needs to be purposefully
developed through pedagogical practice and will positively impact students learning. Reeve, Bolt
4

and Cai (1999) and Wallinger (2010) highlights that a teachers pedagogy and motivating style, as
well as the teacher-student relationship impacts on students achievement, motivation and
emotion. Research illustrates that autonomy-supportive teachers, who support students'
appreciation for and interest in education, enhance students creativity (Koestner, Ryan, Bernieri,
& Holt, 1984), engagement (Reeve, Jang, Carrell, Jeon, & Barch, 2004), positivity (Patrick,
Skinner, & Connell, 1993), conceptual understanding (Grolnick & Ryan, 1987), intrinsic motivation
(Deci, Nezlek, & Sheinman, 1981) and academic achievement (Flink, Boggiano, Main, Barrett, &
Katz, 1992). Deci and Ryan (1991) argue that these benefits of autonomy-supportive teaching
are demonstrated according to self-determination theory, which can be developed through
teacher-provided autonomy support. Therefore highlighting a fundamental pedagogical approach
that is essential to teaching and learning that can be applied within Teaching as Inquiry research.
Although my inquiry focus will be dependent on my new placement environment and
mentor teachers preferences, I would like to focus on inquiry within the context of reading
sessions. Some preliminary areas of inquiry to support and develop student autonomy within
reading lessons include the exploration of independent reading contracts or daily 5. Independent
Reading Contracts (or Independent Learning Contracts (ILC)) are founded on the notion of civic
education, where instruction is non-directive and collaboratively builds an individual programme
which is learner centred (Freie, 1992; Knowles, 1991). Anderson, Boud, and Sampson, (2013)
emphasise that ILC can be adapted to meet students needs along the continuum of teacherdirection and self-directed learning to enhance students independence, motivation and
engagement (Knowles, 1991). Developed by Boushey and Moser (2012) Daily 5 is an approach
to structuring literacy sessions that motivates and engages students in meaningful reading and
writing tasks and increases students independence and achievement (Boushey & Moser, 2006).
Despite the popularity of this literacy structure in New Zealand and worldwide, there is little
educational research on its effectiveness.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I have discovered the purpose and application of educational research
within the classroom environment through a Teaching as Inquiry methodology. This essay has
also highlighted the little restrictions of approaches and situations of educational research. I
discussed and critically evaluated Teaching as Inquiry and consequently explored it as a
methodology. I provided a range of ethical considerations essential within a teaching and
educational research context and highlighted the importance of an awareness of my position as
an insider researcher. Finally I provided some initial thoughts and ideas on my personal teacher
inquiry research, with a broad focus on increasing students autonomy and/or collaboration within
reading sessions.

References
Aitken, G. & Sinnema, C. (2008). Effective pedagogy in Social Sciences / Tikanga Iwi: Best
evidence synthesis iteration [BES]. Wellington, NZ: Ministry of Education.
Alton-Lee, A. (2005, July). A collaborative approach to knowledge building to strengthen policy
and practice in education: The New Zealand Iterative Best Evidence Synthesis
Programme. Paper presented at the Australian Association for Research in Education
National Conference, Quality in Educational Research, Cairns. Retrieved from
http://www.aare.edu.au/data/publications/2005/al05030y.pdf
Anderson, G. J., & Arsenault, N. (1998). Fundamentals of educational research (2nd ed.).
London, UK: Falmer.
Anderson, G., Boud, D., & Sampson, J. (2013). Learning contracts: A practical guide. New York,
NY: Routledge.
Arthur, J. (2012). Research methods and methodologies in education. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Boud, D. J. (1988). Developing student autonomy in learning (2nd ed.). New York; London:
Kogan Page.
Boushey, G., & Moser, J. (2006). The daily 5: Fostering literacy independence in the elementary
grades. Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.
Boushey, G., & Moser, J. (2012). Big ideas behind daily 5 and cafe. Reading Teacher, 66(3), 172178. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01116
Cochran-Smith, M., & Boston College Evidence Team. (2009). Re-culturing teacher education:
Inquiry, evidence, and action. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(5), 458-468.
doi:10.1177/0022487109347206
Cunningham, J. B. (1993). Action Research and Organizational Development. Westport, CT:
Praeger.
Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). A motivational approach to self: Integration in personality. In R.
Dienstbier (Ed.), Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, 38, 237-288. Lincoln: University of
Nebraska Press.
Deci, E. L., Nezlek, J., & Sheinman, L. (1981). Characteristics of the rewarder and intrinsic
motivation of the rewardee. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 40, 1-10.
Flink, C, Boggiano, A. K., Main, D. S., Barrett, M., & Katz, P. A. (1992). Children's achievementrelated behaviors: The role of extrinsic and intrinsic motivational orientations. In A. K.
Boggiano & T. S. Pittman (Eds.), Achievement and motivation: A social-developmental
perspective (pp. 189-214). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Freie, J. F. (1992). The individual learning contract. PS: Political Science & Politics, 25(2), 230.
Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children's learning: An experimental and
individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890898. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.52.5.890
Henning, J. E., Stone, J. M., & Kelly, J. L. (2009). Using action research to improve instruction:
An interactive guide for teachers. New York, NY: Routledge.
7

Hill, L. T., Stremmel, A. J., & Fu, V. R. (2005). Teaching as inquiry: Rethinking curriculum in early
childhood education. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon.
Knowles, M. S. (1991). Using learning contracts. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Koestner, R., Ryan, R. M., Bernieri, F., & Holt, K. (1984). Setting limits on children's behavior: The
differential effects of controlling versus informational styles on intrinsic motivation and
creativity. Journal of Personality, 52, 233-248. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6494.1984.tb00879.x
McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2010). You and your action research project (3rd ed.). New York, NY:
Routledge.
Ministry of Education (2007a). Ka Hikitia Managing for Success: The Mori Education Strategy
20082012. Wellington: Ministry of Education.
Ministry of Education (2007b). The New Zealand Curriculum: For English-medium teaching and
learning in years 1-13. Wellington, NZ: Learning Media Limited.
Ministry of Education (2009). Teaching as Inquiry. Retrieved from
http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/Curriculum-stories/Case-studies/Teachers-as-learnersInquiry/Teaching-as-inquiry
Mutch, C. (2005). Doing educational research: A practitioner's guide to getting started.
Wellington, NZ: NZCER Press.
Patrick, B. C, Skinner, E. A., & Connell, J. P. (1993). What motivates children's behavior and
emotion? Joint effects of perceived control and autonomy in the academic domain.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 65, 781-791. doi:10.1037//00223514.65.4.781
Reeve, J., Bolt, E., & Cai, Y. (1999). Autonomy-supportive teachers: How they teach and motivate
students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(3), 537. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.91.3.537
Reeve, J., Jang, H., Carrell, D., Jeon, S., & Barch, J. (2004). Enhancing students' engagement by
increasing teachers' autonomy support. Motivation and Emotion, 28(2), 147-169.
doi:10.1023/B:MOEM.0000032312.95499.6f
Sarantakos, S. (2005). Social Research. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
Skourdoumbis, A., & Gale, T. (2013). Classroom teacher effectiveness research: A conceptual
critique. British Educational Research Journal, 39(5), 892-906. doi:10.1002/berj.3008
Wallinger, C. L. (2010). Autonomy support 101: How using proven autonomy support techniques
can increase law student autonomy, engender hope, and improve outcomes. Duquesne
Law Review, 48(2), 385.
Wellington, J. J. (2015). Educational research: Contemporary issues and practical approaches
(2nd. ed.). London, UK: Bloomsbury Academic.